ipr
verdigris
ipr | verdigris | |
---|---|---|
4 | 13 | |
216 | 623 | |
- | 0.0% | |
5.0 | 1.5 | |
10 months ago | about 1 year ago | |
C++ | C++ | |
BSD 3-clause "New" or "Revised" License | GNU Lesser General Public License v3.0 only |
Stars - the number of stars that a project has on GitHub. Growth - month over month growth in stars.
Activity is a relative number indicating how actively a project is being developed. Recent commits have higher weight than older ones.
For example, an activity of 9.0 indicates that a project is amongst the top 10% of the most actively developed projects that we are tracking.
ipr
-
Module interfaces for pre-built libraries
I'm not sure about clang or gcc. For VS, u/GabrielDosReis might be able to speak to the .ifc IPR stability/volatility. My wager (deferring to him to correct me) is that the IPR is still changing over time but will stabilize more over time.
-
A new design pattern: the C++ "template mixin"
Have you had a look at its uses in the IPR interface and implementation? https://github.com/GabrielDosReis/ipr/blob/main/include/ipr/interface
-
Carbon Language: An experimental successor to C++
> C++ has virtually zero tooling
CMake, Meson, Waf, Conan, Visual Studio Code, Visual Studio, CLion, Intel VTune, GDB, LLDB, XCode, Artifactory, SonarQube, clang-tidy, clang-format, astyle, Incredibuild...
> Comparing CMake to cargo is like comparing fifth century fireworks to the Space Shuttle
You are wrong here. Cargo serves a set of fixed "this-is-how-to-do-it" thing. In C++ you can build anything. I do not mean it is better, but C++ software already exists and that is the solution that it works better for it. :)
> and the committee is not interested in ever working on that
https://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2017/p08...
Interoperability effort for modules: https://github.com/GabrielDosReis/ipr
-
I hope this would ease C++ tooling
IPR Library
verdigris
-
3rd Edition of Programming: Principles and Practice Using C++ by Stroustrup
This is overly dramatic. The "keywords" are just macros. If you don't want an additional preprocessor to generate code in a separate .cpp file from these macros, you can use https://github.com/woboq/verdigris
The concurrency model, object ownership and life cycle you are mentioning are not part of C++, those are just conventions in specific C++ user groups - Qt code compiles plain and simple with pretty much every conformant C++ compiler and that makes it as much C++ as anything else.
-
Qt Creator 12 Released
There were a couple of attempts in that direction, but i haven't really seen them used in any production codebase.
https://woboq.com/blog/verdigris-qt-without-moc.html
-
Will C++ ever get a standard GUI/2D Graphics library?
Is Moc for signals and slots still needed? Mind you, I haven't used Qt in 15 years, but I was sure I heard about some standard C++ way of building Qt apps without needing the MOC prebuild step (IIRC https://woboq.com/blog/verdigris-qt-without-moc.html).
-
KDE Plasma development switches to Qt 6 tomorrow
Nope, Qt 6 still uses moc. I don't think modern C++ meta programming is quite capable of entirely replacing moc. The closest thing I'm aware of is [0], but it requires additional macros compared to what moc requires, and compilation speed can suffer. Chances are moc won't be dropped until full reflection lands, if ever, and even then if compilation speed is too bad I wouldn't be entirely surprised if moc remains.
[0]: https://github.com/woboq/verdigris
-
[Cpp] Une assez grande liste de bibliothèques graphiques C ++
Verdigris
-
[Weekly] What is everybody working on? Share your progress, discoveries, tips and tricks!
`QML_ELEMENT` support for Verdigris. https://github.com/woboq/verdigris/pull/99
-
Carbon Language: An experimental successor to C++
> it's possible to do Qt without moc even in C++ with https://github.com/woboq/verdigris/, why wouldn't it be possible from D ?
You're talking about an entirely different thing. While OP was referring to the current state of D's ecosystem and the impact that missing key frameworks have on hindering adoption, you're arguing about the theoretical possibility of writing a framework with a language, which really does not address OP's point.
-
GUI for software, not games, but lighter than Qt ?
And much more importantly, MOC specifically is a code generator which has a competitor without the code generation requirement. Fully compatible even. So no, sorry "Qt is bad because MOC" stopped being an argument years ago (if it ever was).
- C++ in the Linux kernel
-
Qt Creator 6 released
But copperspice is not a better version: see the benchmark here: https://woboq.com/blog/verdigris-qt-without-moc.html
What are some alternatives?
ifc-spec - IFC format specification
cpp-httplib - A C++ header-only HTTP/HTTPS server and client library
crubit
WebSocket++ - C++ websocket client/server library
DIPs - D Improvement Proposals
libcurl - A command line tool and library for transferring data with URL syntax, supporting DICT, FILE, FTP, FTPS, GOPHER, GOPHERS, HTTP, HTTPS, IMAP, IMAPS, LDAP, LDAPS, MQTT, POP3, POP3S, RTMP, RTMPS, RTSP, SCP, SFTP, SMB, SMBS, SMTP, SMTPS, TELNET, TFTP, WS and WSS. libcurl offers a myriad of powerful features
PythonNet - Python for .NET is a package that gives Python programmers nearly seamless integration with the .NET Common Language Runtime (CLR) and provides a powerful application scripting tool for .NET developers.
Proxygen - A collection of C++ HTTP libraries including an easy to use HTTP server.
GrayC - GrayC: Greybox Fuzzing of Compilers and Analysers for C
libwebsockets - canonical libwebsockets.org networking library
language - Design of the Dart language
nghttp2 - nghttp2 - HTTP/2 C Library and tools